Performance of Solar Proxy Options of IRI‐Plas Model for Equinox Seasons

Sezen, Umut; Gulyaeva, T.L.; Arıkan, Feza

doi:10.1002/2017ja024994

Cited by 31 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lowest difference in both years is on the order of 20 km in SM with SHU-2015 option. When compared with the height differences given in (Sezen et al, 2018b), global, midlatitude, high-latitude and EQ best fits provide similar results for both IRI and IRI-Plas with BSE-1979 model.…”

Section: 1029/2019ja027048mentioning

confidence: 60%

“…Both IRI and IRI‐Plas performed the same with respect to the data without any TEC input for October 2011 and March 2015. Yet, the input of GIM‐TEC seems to lower the difference significantly for both months providing an improvement of 15% to 30% in NRMS sense (Sezen et al, ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Sezen et al (, ), Online International Reference Ionosphere Extended to Plasmasphere (IRI‐Plas) model was introduced and the model outputs were compared with respect to the various solar and geomagnetic proxy options and Total Electron Content (TEC) input. IRI‐Plas runs similar to IRI for bottom‐side.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) is the international standard ionospheric climatic model. Since the original formation of the international task force in 1970s, the IRI model has been continuously improved by ingesting developments in research in ionosphere. The most current version, namely, IRI‐2016, is offered with International Radio Consultative Committee (CCIR) and International Union of Radio Science (URSI) model choices with “STORM” option for the F2 layer critical plasma frequency (foF2) and BSE‐1979, AMTB‐2013, and SHU‐2015 options for maximum ionization height, hmF2. Since these two parameters are the determining values for the other model outputs, the evaluation of the options offered by IRI‐2016 is critical for various applications. In this study, all foF2 and hmF2 model options offered online at http://irimodel.org are computed for winter and summer solstice and equinox seasons of 2011 and 2015 at the locations of all available ionosondes and for all measurement intervals. The ionosondes are grouped into northern and southern midlatitude, northern and southern high‐latitude and equatorial regions. Individual, regional and global model output foF2 and hmF2 values are compared with those of ionosondes in both root‐mean‐square (RMS) and normalized RMS (NRMS) senses. For foF2, “STORM ON” can be used any time and in any region. Equatorial and high‐latitude regions have larger RMS values due to the sparse ionosondes. In northern midlatitude and high‐latitude regions URSI, in all other regions CCIR is the better option. For hmF2, SHU‐2015 and BSE‐1979 options provide a better fit for all regions, seasons, and years.

show abstract

Section: 1029/2019ja027048mentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the most commonly used model of the ionosphere is the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) model [28], [29], which has been regularly updated as the new data and techniques available over time [30], [31]. Here, we employ the International Reference Ionosphere extended to Plasmasphere (IRI-Plas) [32], [33] due to the facts that the range of IRI-Plas is extended to the 20,000 km, which is the orbital height of Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites, and also, IRI-Plas has the capability of ingesting Total Electron Content (TEC) as an input for further scaling the electron density as described in [34], [35].…”

Section: B Model Based Vertical Electron Density Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Method for Automatic Scaling of Ionograms and Electron Density Reconstruction

Gok

Kemal

Arıkan

et al. 2022

IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sensing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ionogram scaling is the process of reconstructing electron density with respect to height by using the measurements of a remote sensing instrument known as ionosonde. In this study, a novel two stage ionogram scaling technique, ISED, is proposed. In the first stage, Hidden Markov Models (HMMs) are used to identify the actual ionospheric reflections in the ionosonde measurements. In the second stage, an IRI-Plas model based optimization problem is solved to obtain the vertical profile that generates the best least squares fit to the reflections identified in the first stage. To show the performance of ISED in global scale, experiments are conducted on 14,812 ionograms recorded at the three different stations which are Pruhonice in Czech Republic, Eielson in USA and Sao Luis in Brazil. Application of ISED to raw ionograms indicate 97.6% of the cases, ISED provides accurate electron density reconstructions, which is an improvement about 8.7% over ARTIST, most commonly used ionogram scaling technique.

show abstract

“…It is based on the Russian Standard Model of the Ionosphere (SMI). The IRI-Plas 2017 is the latest version of the IRI-Plas model updated from the IRI-Plas 2015 in 2018 (Sezen et al, 2018). Similar to the IRI model, to represent typical conditions as a function of geomagnetic and solar activity, the model is derived from many years of measurements (Chasovitin et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Performance of the IRI 2016, IRI‐Plas 2017, and NeQuick 2 Models During Different Solar Activity (2013–2018) Years Over South American Sector

Tariku

2020

Radio Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study mainly focuses on the prediction of the variability of the vertical total electron content (VTEC) and validation of the new versions of the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI 2016), IRI extended to the plasmasphere (IRI‐Plas 2017), and NeQuick 2 models over the equatorial anomaly region during 2013–2018. The Global Positioning System (GPS)‐derived VTEC data inferred from the South American equatorial region during the relatively high (2013–2014), descending (2015–2016), and low (2017–2018) solar activity years have been considered as measurements to validate the models. The modeled (IRI 2016, IRI‐Plas 2017, and NeQuick 2) VTEC values are generally larger than the GPS‐derived VTEC values, with the highest overestimation being illustrated by the IRI‐Plas 2017 model. Small underestimations are also observed in employing the IRI 2016 and NeQuick 2 models, especially when the solar activity increases. The highest root‐mean‐square Deviations (RMSDs) reaching up to 10 TEC units (TECU) is observed in some hours while using the IRI‐Plas 2017 model during the high solar activity years. RMSDs less than 5 TECU are also observed on most of the hours while utilizing the model during all solar activity years. However, RMSD values less than 2 TECU (while using the NeQuick 2 model) and less than 1 TECU (while using the IRI 2016 model) are seen on most of the hours during 2013–2018. This shows that the performance of the IRI 2016 and NeQuick 2 is better than the IRI‐Plas 2017 with the IRI 2016 model consistently revealing the best in all solar activity years.

show abstract

Performance of Solar Proxy Options of IRI‐Plas Model for Equinox Seasons

Cited by 31 publications

References 47 publications

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

Comparison of IRI‐2016 F2 Layer Model Parameters with Ionosonde Measurements

A Method for Automatic Scaling of Ionograms and Electron Density Reconstruction

Comparison of Performance of the IRI 2016, IRI‐Plas 2017, and NeQuick 2 Models During Different Solar Activity (2013–2018) Years Over South American Sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About